Does anyone know what this is?

Discussions on the fortifications, artillery, & rockets used by the Axis forces.
User avatar
Christian Ankerstjerne
Forum Staff
Posts: 14027
Joined: 10 Mar 2002, 15:07
Location: Denmark
Contact:

#46

Post by Christian Ankerstjerne » 27 Jun 2004, 22:29

I allowed myself to delete a double post...

I guess they forgot to include the holes in the stand?

Christian

User avatar
Harri
Member
Posts: 4230
Joined: 24 Jun 2002, 12:46
Location: Suomi - Finland

#47

Post by Harri » 02 Jul 2004, 00:41

Maybe it is just a piece of the protective wall (not a special stand for anything)?


User avatar
P. Heijkoop
Member
Posts: 718
Joined: 29 Feb 2004, 19:20
Location: Middelburg, The Netherlands
Contact:

#48

Post by P. Heijkoop » 05 Jul 2004, 15:51

Hi Guys,

Was just following this topic the last couple of week.
I want to have your attention for this next photo.
This is the Hochleitstand of the MKB Rozenburg (4x28cm)
in the Netherlands near Rotterdam (Hoek van Holland).
Near the top of the bunker you can see four clock-like signalling devices. These were used for showing the direction of the targets to the gun-emplacements (4x S412) when the telephone or radiocontact had broken down.


I suppose this solved your questions?


Best Wishes,

Peter
Attachments
Hochleitstand.JPG
Hochleitstand.JPG (69.69 KiB) Viewed 898 times

User avatar
kstdk
Member
Posts: 5444
Joined: 10 Jan 2004, 17:59
Location: Denmark
Contact:

#49

Post by kstdk » 05 Jul 2004, 22:09

Hello Peter

Thats conclusive evidence !! It looks like the use could have been the same, most likely it has !!

I have searched for information on the Rozenburg site for a long time now, this is the first picture i have seen in close up of the leitstand.
I have only seen the picture from "legerplatz" and thats from a long distance.

Do you have more from MKB Rozenburg, both the Hochleitstand ( its a
S 497 is it not ) and the gunsites S412 - i would be most interested in more info and particular pictures.

This battery was demolished years ago, was´nt it ??

regards
Kurt
kstdk

Mark V
Member
Posts: 3925
Joined: 22 May 2002, 10:41
Location: Suomi Finland

#50

Post by Mark V » 05 Jul 2004, 22:32

Thanks Peter.

Wonderfull picture. I guess that control tower does not remain today. :cry:

And for sure the intent of those "clocks" in the picture you posted is clear. MUST be signalling device.

Mark V

User avatar
Erik E
Member
Posts: 4517
Joined: 11 Mar 2002, 23:26
Location: Stavanger, Norway
Contact:

#51

Post by Erik E » 05 Jul 2004, 23:31

That is indeed a intersting photo!
Looks like a robot from a 60`s sci-fi movie :D

Here are some related impressions:
Attachments
3.JPG
3.JPG (52.52 KiB) Viewed 866 times
2.JPG
2.JPG (54.44 KiB) Viewed 866 times
1.JPG
1.JPG (30.04 KiB) Viewed 866 times

Mark V
Member
Posts: 3925
Joined: 22 May 2002, 10:41
Location: Suomi Finland

#52

Post by Mark V » 05 Jul 2004, 23:37

... apparently not one-off rangefinder turret design.

Where it was mounted in Norway ?? rough figure of base lenght ??


Mark V

User avatar
Erik E
Member
Posts: 4517
Joined: 11 Mar 2002, 23:26
Location: Stavanger, Norway
Contact:

#53

Post by Erik E » 05 Jul 2004, 23:49

It was mounted on the firecontrolpost at MKB Örlandet which holds the last remaining gun of the Gneisenau (C turret)!

The rangefinder itself is 10 meters from tip to tip (Entfernungsmesser 10M)

EE

User avatar
kstdk
Member
Posts: 5444
Joined: 10 Jan 2004, 17:59
Location: Denmark
Contact:

#54

Post by kstdk » 05 Jul 2004, 23:59

Hello Erik

YES - lets see some more of your resent photos from your trip to "The North" of Norway !!!!!!

I believe you had quite a "Grand Trip" there, did´nt you !!!!

Regards
Kurt
kstdk.

Mark V
Member
Posts: 3925
Joined: 22 May 2002, 10:41
Location: Suomi Finland

#55

Post by Mark V » 05 Jul 2004, 23:59

Thanks Erik.

Well, it seems that one more mystery is solved. Germans did use visual signalling as back-up in some marine coastal batteries.


Mark V

User avatar
Erik E
Member
Posts: 4517
Joined: 11 Mar 2002, 23:26
Location: Stavanger, Norway
Contact:

#56

Post by Erik E » 06 Jul 2004, 00:08

YES - lets see some more of your resent photos from your trip to "The North" of Norway !!!!!!

I believe you had quite a "Grand Trip" there, did´nt you !!!!
Would be rather off-topic to post those here.....

Maybe I`ll post a highlight thread tomorrow :wink:

EE

User avatar
Harri
Member
Posts: 4230
Joined: 24 Jun 2002, 12:46
Location: Suomi - Finland

#57

Post by Harri » 06 Jul 2004, 19:33

I'm still not convinced. There are still too many unsolved questions:
1.) Why there are two "clocks" on each side of the fire control tower? "Stereo clock"?
2.) These "clocks" look too weak to be used during any combat (fire control towers are targets number one in real combat situation)
3.) Later "clocks" don't have any slots for lights (like the previous one), or do they?
4.) Later "clocks" are totally different from the previous one
5.) Like I said earlier this "clock signalling" sounds perhaps a very good idea when no-one is shooting back, but if the coastal battery or fort is attacked by aircraft or warships with big enough guns all such devices are useless after the very first bombardment.
6.) If that type of signalling would have had some advantages it for sure would have been used everywhere else too, unless there is some reason to use them only in selected locations?

And so on. I think we haven't yet found the right answer, far from it. If someone can answer to all these questions and doubts in a way that will convince me (and the others) then I for sure can admit that I was wrong. :wink:

Yet another proposal: could these "clocks" had some kind of training purpose?

Mark V
Member
Posts: 3925
Joined: 22 May 2002, 10:41
Location: Suomi Finland

#58

Post by Mark V » 06 Jul 2004, 22:05

Well Harri,

Tell us then what purpose those "clocks" served if not signalling ??

Hmmm... maybe the first showed the Berlin time and another Greenwich time so that nobody in battery would miss BBC:s evening news... :wink:

Mark V

User avatar
Harri
Member
Posts: 4230
Joined: 24 Jun 2002, 12:46
Location: Suomi - Finland

#59

Post by Harri » 06 Jul 2004, 22:26

Very funny. :D But you didn't either answer any of my questions.

I'd tell if I knew what for the "clocks" are. I'm as surprised as all, but "signalling with clocks" sounds like a "peace-time invention". During the war such wise things seldom work in practise. One more question:
7.) were similar kind of clocks also used by peace-time German coastal artillery or navy? Any proves?

Signalling with flashing light is OK for me if the light sectors are limited (narrow) to certain directions and their bunkers heavily protected.

Here is some more:
If we have clocks what for we usually have them? For timing.
8.) What kind of shots were used in coastal guns and has timing something to do with them?
9.) What kind of shooting methods Germans used?

Well...? :)

User avatar
Erik E
Member
Posts: 4517
Joined: 11 Mar 2002, 23:26
Location: Stavanger, Norway
Contact:

#60

Post by Erik E » 06 Jul 2004, 22:34

1.) Why there are two "clocks" on each side of the fire control tower? "Stereo clock"?
Why does every signals officer have two flags? To increase the number of different signals to covar all letters & numbers.
2.) These "clocks" look too weak to be used during any combat (fire control towers are targets number one in real combat situation)

The rangefinder is even weaker, so this is no real argument... They just had to hope that the tower wasn`t hit!
3.) Later "clocks" don't have any slots for lights (like the previous one), or do they?
Lights in the first one was just guessing.... We don`t know if there was lights at all?? Even if there were, this is no standarized design, and vill ofcourse be different depending on who built them, and who used them
4.) Later "clocks" are totally different from the previous one
Pretty much same answer as no.3.... This is a special addition, not standarized, so I am not surprised at all if they are different. 100`s of "one of a kind" bunkers exsist in the AW.
5.) Like I said earlier this "clock signalling" sounds perhaps a very good idea when no-one is shooting back, but if the coastal battery or fort is attacked by aircraft or warships with big enough guns all such devices are useless after the very first bombardment.

If you look at it in a even wider spectre then.... If they would drop this small 500 reichmark detail becouse of counterfire, why not drop the whole battery and build some planes instead. As seen in many coastal batteries, the entire place could be wiped out by counterfire.
Thinking:
"Lets place the guns in open emplacements, the personell in wooden barracks, rangefinder in a churchtower....But drop the signals equipment. It won`t stand the counterfire"
6.) If that type of signalling would have had some advantages it for sure would have been used everywhere else too, unless there is some reason to use them only in selected locations?
Depends on the geographical layout of the terrain, distance to guns or other batteries, tactical plans for defence, or if they simply had other kinds of backup signalling systems.

Just my humble opinion :)

But if the photo Peter H. posted isn`t a signalling device..... What could it then be!?!? I think this photo killed all previous theories!

EE

Post Reply

Return to “Fortifications, Artillery, & Rockets”